Space News
space history and artifacts articles

Messages
space history discussion forums

Sightings
worldwide astronaut appearances

Resources
selected space history documents

Forum:Mercury - Gemini - Apollo
Topic:Gemini hatches and emergency egress
Want to register?
Who Can Post? Any registered users may post a reply.
About Registration You must be registered in order to post a topic or reply in this forum.
Your UserName:
Your Password:   Forget your password?
Your Reply:


*HTML is ON
*UBB Code is ON

Smilies Legend

Options Disable Smilies in This Post.
Show Signature: include your profile signature. Only registered users may have signatures.
*If HTML and/or UBB Code are enabled, this means you can use HTML and/or UBB Code in your message.

If you have previously registered, but forgotten your password, click here.

NavyPilotGo-to reference: Development and Qualification of Gemini Escape System.

space1The responses so far discuss Gemini seat ejection. But that would be an extreme response to a cabin fire. And it would not work at all if the pad white room were still in place.

The Gemini hatch was very different from the original Block I Apollo hatch. The Apollo hatch was in two pieces, with the inner hatch opening inward by being completely removed from the hatch sill. Then the outer hatch would be hinged open.

The Gemini hatch could quickly be opened by cranking on the inner hatch handle for a few strokes, unlocking the latches. The hatch could then be pushed open on its hinges. (If the cabin were under pressure, the hatch would readily open (slightly) with the first crank of the handle, enough to release the excessive cabin pressure. Also, at no time would the Gemini hatch be released from its hinges.)

The astronauts and ground crew were trained for quickly egressing the Gemini. I don't know offhand if a cabin fire was particularly considered. Fire resistant materials were commonly used, such as Nomex for the suit. And the fabric on the cabin walls was treated with a fire retardant. But no special consideration was given to the effects of a pure oxygen atmosphere on a cabin fire.

David CBack to the ground level ejection scenario. Tom Stafford has commented several times that he wasn’t convinced. Here’s the version in his oral history:
...what we would have seen, had we had to do that, would have been two Roman candles going out, because we were 15 or 16 psi, pure oxygen, soaking in that for an hour and a half.
The tests were not conducted under those conditions.
space1Regarding Stafford's ejection comments, he was not even referring to a fire in the cockpit. He was saying that a standard Gemini ejection scenario would ignite the pure oxygen in the cabin and cause their oxygen-soaked suits to catch fire.
David CCorrect.
Jim Behling
quote:
Originally posted by space1:
He was saying that a standard Gemini ejection scenario would ignite the pure oxygen in the cabin and cause their oxygen-soaked suits to catch fire.
Which really would not happen and is a myth regardless what the astronauts said.*
  1. Oxygen does not burn.
  2. The seats and astronauts would be moving too fast for anything to ignite.
  3. The suit outer layer was nomex which does not burn
  4. The seats are already outside mixing with air before the motor starts.
* astronaut said they almost crashed on the moon in Apollo 10.
space1Jim, I think you are most likely right. The problem (as you know) is that the Nomex, and other fabrics including parachutes, would have been soaking in pure oxygen for over an hour. When fabrics for Apollo were being tested after the fire, Nomex was not chosen for use. So it is not ideal under these conditions.

The question would be whether the ignition source would have had an effect on those materials as they were moving through the air. Timing of ignition, oxygen density as the hatches were opened, and other factors would determine the outcome. I think the ejection would have been fine. But we'll never know for sure.

Contact Us | The Source for Space History & Artifacts

Copyright 1999-2024 collectSPACE. All rights reserved.





advertisement